gwern comments on Justifiable Erroneous Scientific Pessimism - Less Wrong

14 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 08 May 2013 08:37PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (116)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 09 May 2013 04:16:56PM *  9 points [-]

You accuse lukeprog of being misleading in taking a quote from a mere "librarian", and as we all know, a librarian is a harmless drudge who just shelves books, hence

it doesn't confer the kind of expertise that would make it surprising or even very interesting for Taube to have been wrong here.

I accuse you of being highly misleading in at least two ways here:

  1. in 1960, a librarian is one of the occupations - outside actual computer-based occupations - most likely to have hands-on familiarity with computers & things like Boolean logic, for the obvious reason that being a librarian is often about research where computers are invaluable. A librarian could well have extensive experience, and so it's not much of a mark against him.
  2. Mortimer Taube turns out to be the kind of 'librarian' who exemplifies this; the little byline to his letter about "Documentation Incorporated" should have been an indicator that maybe he was more than just a random schoolhouse librarian stamping in kids' books, but because you did not see fit to add any background on what sort of 'librarian' Taube was, I will:

    ...He is on the list of the 100 most important leaders in Library and Information Science of the 20th century.[1] He was important to the Library Science field because he invented Coordinate Indexing, which uses “uniterms” in the context of cataloging. It is the forerunner to computer based searches. In the early 1950s he started his own company, Documentation, Inc. with Gerald J. Sophar. Previously he worked at such institutions as the Library of Congress, the Department of Defense, and the Atomic Energy Commission. American Libraries calls him “an innovator and inventor, as well as scholar and savvy businessman.”[1] Current Biography called him the “Dewey of mid-twentieth Librarianship.”[2]

    ...Mortimer Taube received his Bachelors of Arts in Philosophy from the University of Chicago in 1933. He then pursued at PhD in the same field from the University of California at Berkeley in 1935.

    ...In 1944, Mortimer Taube left academia behind to become a true innovator in the field of science, especially Information Science. After the war, there was a huge boom of scientific invention, and the literature to go with it. The contemporary indexing and retrieval methods simply could not handle the inflow.[2] New technology was needed to meet this high demand and Mortimer Taube delivered.He dabbled in many projects during and after the war. In 1944 he joined the Library of Congress as the Assistant Chief of the General Reference and Bibliographical Division.[4] He was then head of the Science and Technology project from 1947-1949.[2] He worked for the Atomic Energy Commission, which was established after “the Manhattan District Project wanted to evaluate and publish the scientific and engineering records showing the advancements made during the war.”[2]

    ...Mortimer Taube also worked heavily with documentation, the literature pertaining to the new scientific innovation.[2] He was a consultant and Lecturer on Scientific Documentation and was even the editor of American Documentation in the years 1952-1953.[2] In 1952, Taube founded his own company, Documentation, Inc. with Gerald J. Sophar and two others.[4] Documentation, Inc. was the “largest aerospace information center” and did work for NASA.[4] Here Taube developed Coordinate Indexing, and important innovation in the field of Library Science. Taube defines Coordinate Indexing as, “the analysis of any field of information into a set of terms and the combination of these terms in any order to achieve any desired degree of detail in either indexing or selection."[6] Coordinate Indexing used “uniterms” to make storing and retrieving information easier and faster.[2]

    ...Taube had split coordinate indexing into two categories, item and term indexing.[7] It used punch cards and a machine reader to search for specific items or documents by terms or keywords.[7] Documentation, Inc. also brought forth the IBM 9900 Special Index Analyzer, also known as COMAC.[2][8] COMAC stood for “continuous multiple access controller.” This machine handled data punch cards, used for information storage and retrieval.[2] It made “logical relationships among terms.”[2] Even though Documentation Inc. started as a small company, it soon grew to well over 700 members.[4]

    ...Even though his technology seems to be the forerunner of OPACs and computer cataloging systems, Taube himself personally didn’t like the idea of computers taking over modern life.[4] He believed that “computers didn’t think.”[4] Even though he is an important figure in Information Science, he also seemed to remain interested in philosophy. He was writing a book on the subject before he died.[4]

    So to summarize: he was a trained philosopher and tech startup co-founder who invented new information technology and handled documentation tasks who was familiar with the cybernetics literature and traveled in the same circles as people like Vannevar Bush.

    And you write

    A librarian is a fine thing to be, but it doesn't confer the kind of expertise that would make it surprising or even very interesting for Taube to have been wrong here.

    !

An upvote for correctly contextualizing what Taube wrote, and a mental downvote for being lazy or deceptive in your final paragraph.

Comment author: gjm 09 May 2013 07:03:58PM *  6 points [-]

You accuse lukeprog of being misleading in taking a quote from a mere "librarian", and as we all know, a librarian is a harmless drudge who just shelves books

I really can't think of a polite way to say this, so:

Bullshit.

  1. I wasn't accusing Luke of anything; I was disagreeing with him. Disagreement is not accusation. When I want to make an accusation, I will make an accusation, like this one: You have mischaracterized what I wrote, and made totally false insinuations about my opinions and attitudes, and I have to say I'm pretty shocked to see someone as generally excellent as you behaving in such a way.

  2. I do not think, and I did not say, and I had not the slightest intention of implying, that "a librarian is a harmless drudge who just shelves books".

Allow me to remind you how Luke's comment begins. The boldface emphasis is mine.

We also know many famous examples of scientists just completely making up their pessimism, for example about the impossibility of human heavier-than-air flight.

This isn't what you asked for, but I might as well enumerate a few of these examples, for everyone's benefit. For the field of AI research:

Taube was, despite his many excellent qualities, not a scientist as that term is generally understood, and he was, despite his many excellent qualities, not working in "the field of AI research".

(Yes, I know the Wikipedia page says he was "a true innovator in the field of science". Reading what it says he did, though, I really can't see that what he did was science. For the avoidance of doubt, and in the probably overoptimistic hope that saying this will stop you pulling the same what-a-snob-this-person-is move as you already did above, I don't think that "not science" is in any way the same sort of thing as "not valuable" or "not important" or "not difficult". What the creators of (say) the Firefox web browser did was important and valuable and difficult, but happens not to be science. What Beethoven did was important and valuable and difficult, but happens not to be science. What Martin Luther King did was important and valuable and difficult, but happens not to be science.)

Pointing this out doesn't mean I think there's anything wrong with being a librarian. When I said "a librarian is a fine thing to be", I meant it. (And, for the avoidance of doubt, it is my opinion both when "librarian" means "someone who shelves books in a library" and when it means "a world-class expert on organizing information in catalogues".)

Now, having said all that, I should add that you are quite right about one thing: when I said that Taube was neither a computer expert nor a philosopher, I was oversimplifying. (Not least because I hadn't looked deeply into Taube's career.) He was an important innovator in the use of punched cards for document indexing, which is quite a bit like being a computer expert; and he was a PhD in philosophy, which is quite a bit like being a philosopher. None the less, I stand by what I said: neither being a world-class expert in document indexing, nor knowing a lot about punched-card reading machinery, nor being a PhD in philosophy, seems to me to be the kind of expertise that makes it particularly startling if one's wrong about whether machines can play chess.

(And, once again, for the avoidance of doubt, I am not in the least trying to belittle his expertise and creativity. I just don't see that they were the kind of expertise and creativity that make it startling for someone to be wrong about the possibilities of computer chess-playing.)

[EDITED to clarify a bit of wording and add some emphasis. ... And again, later, to add a missing negative; oops. Also, while I'm here, two other remarks. 1: I regret the confrontational tone this exchange has taken; but I don't see any way I could have responded sufficiently forcefully to the accusations levelled at me without perpetuating it. 2: I see a lot of downvotes are flying around in this subthread. For the record, I haven't cast any.]

Comment author: wedrifid 09 May 2013 04:25:16PM 2 points [-]

So to summarize: he was a trained philosopher and tech startup co-founder who invented new information technology and handled documentation tasks who was familiar with the cybernetics literature and traveled in the same circles as people like Vannevar Bush.

Thankyou for your research. I was mislead by the grandparent.

Comment author: lukeprog 09 May 2013 05:35:49PM 1 point [-]

You accuse Eliezer of being misleading in taking a quote from a mere "librarian",

"Eliezer" should be "lukeprog".

Comment author: gwern 09 May 2013 05:38:55PM 3 points [-]

Hah, whups. And so it goes - you correct Eliezer's lack of examples, gjm corrects your description of Taube, I correct gjm's description of Taube, and you correct my description of gjm's description...